Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Leuk Lymphoma ; 65(8): 1167-1174, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38625039

RESUMEN

There is limited knowledge regarding the prevalence of geriatric impairments and frailty among patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in a real-world setting. This study evaluated the distribution of frailty profiles among 116 patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed MM, using four common frailty scales. The proportion of patients classified as frail varied significantly, ranging from 15.5% to 56.9%, due to differences in how frailty was operationalized between each frailty measure. Functional, cognitive, and mobility impairments were common overall and irrespective of performance status. Analyses between frailty and treatment selection (dose reduction and doublet vs. triplet therapy) demonstrated significant differences in non-steroid MM drug dose reductions between frail vs. non-frail patients, as scored by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) Frailty Index and Simplified Frailty Score (p < .05). A standardized approach to frailty assessment that is practical in application, and beneficial in guiding treatment selection and minimizing treatment related toxicity is necessary to provide optimal tailored care.


Asunto(s)
Fragilidad , Evaluación Geriátrica , Mieloma Múltiple , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiple/epidemiología , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiple/diagnóstico , Anciano , Masculino , Femenino , Fragilidad/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Estudios Prospectivos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano Frágil/estadística & datos numéricos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos
2.
J Geriatr Oncol ; 15(3): 101735, 2024 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38460399

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Many of the newer treatments for adults with newly-diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) are orally administered. Adherence is a challenge, and little is known about strategies to optimize adherence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients initiating orally-administered anti-myeloma therapy were enrolled and randomized in a pilot study to receive either standard of care teaching or the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer Oral agent Teaching Tool (MOATT), a structured teaching tool. Adherence was measured electronically with a Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) cap. Optimal adherence was defined as an adherence rate of ≥90% over the six months study duration. Patients completed surveys regarding cancer therapy satisfaction and self-efficacy for medication management at one month and six months following the initiation of treatment in both arms. RESULTS: The mean adherence of patients over six months was 86.9%; 43.9% of the cohort were classified as non-adherent using the 90% threshold of adherence. Mean adherence was similar among standard of care teaching (87.9%) versus the MOATT intervention tool (85.6%) as was cancer therapy satisfaction and self-efficacy for medication management. DISCUSSION: In our pilot, the MOATT tool was not found to be feasible or acceptable. There were no preliminary differences noted between standard of care teaching versus the structured MOATT teaching tool with regards to overall adherence rates, cancer therapy satisfaction, or self-efficacy in medication management. Overall adherence rates were suboptimal in our study. Future research should work to identify aspects of educational interventions which are effective, and investigate different strategies which can be used to supplement patient education and potentially optimize medication adherence in patients with MM.


Asunto(s)
Mieloma Múltiple , Humanos , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Proyectos Piloto , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Administración Oral
3.
Patient ; 3(4): 249-56, 2010 Dec 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22273432

RESUMEN

Despite the increased popularity of conjoint analysis in health outcomes research, little is known about what specific methods are being used for the design and reporting of these studies. This variation in method type and reporting quality sometimes makes it difficult to assess substantive findings. This review identifies and describes recent applications of conjoint analysis based on a systematic review of conjoint analysis in the health literature. We focus on significant unanswered questions for which there is neither compelling empirical evidence nor agreement among researchers.We searched multiple electronic databases to identify English-language articles of conjoint analysis applications in human health studies published since 2005 through to July 2008. Two independent reviewers completed the detailed data extraction, including descriptive information, methodological details on survey type, experimental design, survey format, attributes and levels, sample size, number of conjoint scenarios per respondent, and analysis methods. Review articles and methods studies were excluded. The detailed extraction form was piloted to identify key elements to be included in the database using a standardized taxonomy.We identified 79 conjoint analysis articles that met the inclusion criteria. The number of applied studies increased substantially over time in a broad range of clinical applications, cancer being the most frequent. Most used a discrete-choice survey format (71%), with the number of attributes ranging from 3 to 16. Most surveys included 6 attributes, and 73% presented 7-15 scenarios to each respondent. Sample size varied substantially (minimum = 13, maximum = 1258), with most studies (38%) including between 100 and 300 respondents. Cost was included as an attribute to estimate willingness to pay in approximately 40% of the articles across all years.Conjoint analysis in health has expanded to include a broad range of applications and methodological approaches. Although we found substantial variation in methods, terminology, and presentation of findings, our observations on sample size, the number of attributes, and number of scenarios presented to respondents should be helpful in guiding researchers when planning a new conjoint analysis study in health.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA